Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 212 posts

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#131

Post by lnsru »

DiggyJohnson wrote: post #26

Seems more nuanced than this discussion is making it out. We have had attrition and recruiting challenges with RTO, but also noticeable improvements in morale and productivity - especially when it comes to onboarding new folks.

I onboarded experienced engineer with hybrid approach very well. He’s super productive working from home now. The biggest problem is tutoring absolute greenhorns that need mentoring daily. Big corp I work for has full RTO and I quit, another guy quit and the guy I onboarded is also looking for new job.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#132

Post by marcosdumay »

andersa wrote: post #34
obnauticus wrote: post #9

It is unclear who wants RTO, at least within tech and other leaders whom I know within tech.

The people who have investments in commercial real estate want it. All those ginormous office buildings... would be obsolete.

> would be obsolete

I doubt this. Would probably be cheaper, but I doubt the rental market is so inelastic that the new price will break anything.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#133

Post by [deleted] »

gottorf wrote: post #3

Of course it's too early to tell with lots of confounding variables, but labor productivity has been taking a steep dive[0]. So perhaps in the aggregate, WFH is resulting in less work being done. I say this as someone who's been full-time WFH for over a decade; I'm not taking a position one way or another. [0]: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MPU4910063

[deleted]

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#134

Post by bluefishinit »

elvis10ten wrote: post #128
bluefishinit wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I feel the ideal environment is contextual and it’s probably a hybrid work environment where people who want to work remote can but have to touch base in-person a few times every month This necessitates living near the office/only hiring people that live near the office. I will not let my employer dictate where I live and I will not live in some of the most expensive real-estate markets in the world

That’s why I said it’s contextual :) There is always a good enough balance (I think). Some of my colleagues live outside Berlin and I think they are only required to come to the office a few times a month and they haven’t complained so far.

I would never work somewhere that required me to be in office a few times a month. You still have to live within driving distance to the office (or take a plane a few times a month which is even worse).

I think over time we'll see that the "balance" is actually 100% WFH unless physical presence is absolutely required (like you're making and selling sandwiches). It's just going to take a while for the new fully remote companies to replace those who refuse to adapt.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#135

Post by marcosdumay »

unglaublich wrote: post #24
light_hue_1 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As always, the people with the most options and who are most in demand will be the ones to leave first. I've seen this firsthand. Then you're left with the worst people, people who are unhappy but stuck, and people who just can't be bothered to do anything about it. Sounds like a great recipe for productivity! I love working with my fellow cage-mates.

The least talented people will likely stick around because finding alternative employment is more challenging for them. That's disastrous for morale.

> That's disastrous for morale.

At some point, nobody will care or only the people that won't bother doing anything about it will care.

I don't think morale is the right metric to use here.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#136

Post by briandear »

antisthenes wrote: post #89
xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #75

Anecdotally my org is on a hiring tear lately and we're completely remote, and the quality of candidates has steeply risen as of late. I mean really good candidates I'd rarely see before are pouring into my inbox. I've never talked to so many folks currently at Google, Meta, Amazon, but also big banks and other F500s. Many candidates are coy about their reasons for leaving, especially given all the layoffs, but, stil…

> I talked to a director last week who spends 1/3 the year in ski country, 1/3 the year in the Midwest and 1/3 the year on the coast. He's not going back, and practically anyone would be lucky to have him. Does he actually spend any time working?

How does location determine how much someone works?

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#137

Post by marcosdumay »

2023throwawayy wrote: post #4

> The survey equates the displeasure of shifting from a flexible work model to a traditional one to that of experiencing a 2-3% pay cut. I think they forgot a 0.

They probably averaged a bunch of people that equated it to 30% with a bunch of people that liked being in the office.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#138

Post by petsfed »

commandlinefan wrote: post #104
wredue wrote: post #50

I reclaim 1.5 hours a day from work from home, so a mandated back to work would actually represent a 6 point pay cut on the day assuming I thought that through properly. I don’t even have an egregious commute compared to others. Never mind that all of a sudden I no longer need before and after daycare. I have a home gym and can acceptably exercise at lunch. I don’t have peer pressures to go out for lunch all the time…

> transparently a middle management “I’m still relevant!” Which makes one wonder who the people who kept posting on here how much they missed the office and wished we'd go back to the office during the pandemic actually were.

Speaking only for myself, I don't know that I actually like working from home, its just that all the stupid stuff I have to do to get into the office makes it so much better to just not go in.

I actually enjoy interacting with my coworkers, but the time I would enjoy spending with them outside of work, I instead have to spend on the road.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#139

Post by LatteLazy »

yomlica8 wrote: post #117
LatteLazy wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are. I think in both cases people were selecting between us and another job. One said he was taking another job for 10k LESS (GBP) but full remote. (As always, the stated reasons might not be accurate)

The cost of maintaining transportation and the unpaid hours from a commute are quite significant. Depending upon their circumstances they could be taking home more money even being paid less.

100% this.

Here in the UK, just not having to live near London will save you enormous amounts on rent/mortgage as well.

I'm in the office full time (I actually need to be) and I pay 700 a month just in rent on a crappy room not too close to central. That alone is the equivalent of about £17k before tax, and I am a single guy who doesn't mind housemates. No thanks.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#140

Post by DiggyJohnson »

andrewaylett wrote: post #65
DiggyJohnson wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer RTO and being in the office with the entire team. That doesn't make me crazy, and I know several others on my team feel the same way.

I don't mind occasionally being in the office with my entire team. The problem is that my team is split across three offices in different cities. We have folk who prefer to work from the office, and that's fine. But it makes team meetings more challenging than they are when everyone's at home. When we were only spread across two offices, we'd occasionally have a team day in one or other of the offices. But the third…

Oh certainly: in the case of distributed teams I much prefer WFH.
Post reply on HN